Choosing a cycle helmet - commuter or road?

[Fab Foodie]

Does the "Schnell" standard apply to racing helmets?

The 'Snail' standard applies to mine ....

 

[philepo]

Honestly, this seems as nonsensical as the thread I made the mistake of taking seriously. Find a helmet that you like, with number of vents you deem necessary, that's as "visible" as you want. But remember

• Always wear a helmet. If this makes you uncomfortable, think of the helmet as a crown and yourself as King Dorko.

Yes, this is a fairly innocuous, pointless, nonsensical thread but it is a real question, not one designed to wind anyone up. The point I was making was that a few weeks ago I bought a helmet (not my choice, I doubt they do v much but it stops me getting agro (plus I have had a few near misses in my new big City commute that made me reassess this opinion)) and I went for black colour, as that seemed the best looking to my eyes, i.e. subtle (yes, I am vain, and when I see a middle aged man in lycra I physically want to wretch/laugh my socks off - and without expensive therapy my vanity isn't going to change soon).

So, now that I think about it a bit more, I think I missed a trick, as I do think that fluro clothes (or flashes on them) make cyclists much more visible (in the day) and that is sensible (I'm a car driver and you can tell I'm an idiot till you're blue in the face but cyclists can be hard to spot). So I think maybe I should have actually gone for the neon greeny yellow version and so then I wouldn't have the awful compulsion to wear a Sam Browne or builders' hi viz vest (joke: no insult meant to anyone who does). I just wondered, in a curious non-important pointless killing time in my boring quiet period at work way, if anyone who is more into cycling than me would agree...

I have now reached a solution i think, in that I have ordered some yellow fluro tape so I'll put a few strips of that on instead. King Dorko indeed.

 

[mjr]

Yes, this is a fairly innocuous, pointless, nonsensical thread but it is a real question, not one designed to wind anyone up.

Oh come on! This thread is repeating the 2 H myths too often not to wind anyone up and then you post this:

I have now reached a solution i think, in that I have ordered some yellow fluro tape so I'll put a few strips of that on instead.

Do NOT stick random stuff to the outside of your helmet with glues that may contain solvents that will damage the shell and mean you don't even get the limited impact protection they're tested for. Or, as Specialized Helmet Owners Manual puts it more succinctly: "WARNING: Do not attach anything to your helmet"

I find it pretty upsetting that people won't reject these clothes entirely, but if you are going to wear them, then please at least try to maximise the probability of benefit by following the manufacturer's directions.

 

[philepo]

Oh come on! This thread is repeating the 2 H myths too often not to wind anyone up and then you post this:

I am not winding you up and though I have picked things up from surfing the web, I am not familiar with any heated debates in cycling except the helmet one. I suppose because I am also not a proper cyclist, just a commuter who likes machines with wheels really, I may ask daft sounding questions...

Do NOT stick random stuff to the outside of your helmet with glues that may contain solvents that will damage the shell and mean you don't even get the limited impact protection they're tested for. Or, as Specialized Helmet Owners Manual puts it more succinctly: "WARNING: Do not attach anything to your helmet"

I think that's reasonable as a general rule of thumb, though I would counter and say that it's the compressive foam that protects from deceleration forces on the brain, not the thin plastic outer bit. Isn't that just there to keep the foam on yer ed? Spesialized have to add warning stickers like car companies have to make cars ring a bong bong bong when the door is oped ("stop boinging at me, I know its opened, i've just pulled the f****** door handle")

I find it pretty upsetting that people won't reject these clothes entirely, but if you are going to wear them, then please at least try to maximise the probability of benefit by following the manufacturer's directions.

By clothes, do you mean helmet and hi viz? - do you include Lycra (the devils own material)? I have to say, whenever I see a bloke over 21 in Lycra I want to vomit/ laugh hysterically / hide my eyes / make it illegal. in my opinion this is infinity times worse a crime than the 2 Hs...

We shouldn't get into a helmet row, but I will say this: I think the travelling world would be safe without helmets, but I do think a few flashes of hi viz make a huge difference to visibility, and since the main excuse is 'soz didn't see you' I think its sensible. Also, the EU () have made daytime running lights compulsory for cars, which makes it even more of a problem to stand out (in my opinion, as a car driver).

 

[mjr]

I would counter and say that it's the compressive foam that protects from deceleration forces on the brain, not the thin plastic outer bit. Isn't that just there to keep the foam on yer ed?

As I understand it, the hard shell is not only to keep the foam on, it's also to distribute the inital impact through more of the foam to make it less likely to crack or be pierced. Also, there's still the same deceleration force of the brain which is why helmet-wearers still get concussed, although it's spread over a greater time. Without getting into the helmet debate, if you're going to wear one, please use it as directed, else there's really little point.

since the main excuse is 'soz didn't see you' I think its sensible

Do you think that excuse is sincere, accurate and indicates that you were hard to see? When it's happened to me, I think it's far more likely they simply didn't look but who's going to admit that?

the EU () have made daytime running lights compulsory for cars

EUromyth. They haven't, although UN regulations say new cars have to have them fitted, it need not be easy to switch them off and so an increasing number of people leave them on.

 

[jefmcg]

By clothes, do you mean helmet and hi viz? - do you include Lycra (the devils own material)? I have to say, whenever I see a bloke over 21 in Lycra I want to vomit/ laugh hysterically / hide my eyes / make it illegal. in my opinion this is infinity times worse a crime than the 2 Hs...

You care too much about what other people think about you, and about what other people wear. Are you 12?

If I may, I would like to draw the courts attention to exhibit A, previously submitted as evidence

I went to a very posh girl's school in Melbourne. Our summer uniform included long white socks. There was a secret rule amongst the students that the socks should be down around the ankles. So it was a constant battle of teachers telling girls to pull their socks up , and girls pushing them down as soon as the teacher's back was turned. That year they formed the first Student Representative Council, and the only thing they achieved was getting short socks added to the uniform as an acceptable alternative to long socks.

A few years later, I ran into a friend's younger sister, who was at the school several years after me. She was on the SRC. I mention to her how useless the SRC was that year, as the socks rule change was the only thing they did. "Oh my God!" she said "Only a dork would wear short socks!".

 

[jefmcg]

Does the "Schnell" standard apply to racing helmets?

I can't believe I germanicised Snell, seconds after googling it.

Not sure if this was a serious question, or just having a go at me for my creative spelling but
http://www.smf.org/certlist/std_B-90A_B-95A_B-90C_B-95C#S

(if it's there, it meets the standard. If not, then .... well, it hasn't passed their tests, but it may never have been submitted)

 

[philepo]

As I understand it, the hard shell is not only to keep the foam on, it's also to distribute the inital impact through more of the foam to make it less likely to crack or be pierced.

That makes sense to me

Also, there's still the same deceleration force of the brain which is why helmet-wearers still get concussed, although it's spread over a greater time.

Sorry, physics disagrees. However, I will answer you in the helmet thread so as not to upset sensitive souls! Here: https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/the-cyclechat-helmet-debate-thread.187059/page-183

QUOTE="mjray, post: 4187798, member: 34410"] Do you think that excuse is sincere, accurate and indicates that you were hard to see? When it's happened to me, I think it's far more likely they simply didn't look but who's going to admit that? [/QUOTE]

If you are correct, then that excuse is not valid, and so everyone who uses it, whether it be cos they hit a car/cyclist/bus/pedestrian, simply didn't look. Therefore we can assume that these people cannot be forced to look (how would we?) and we must adapt by being defensive riders expecting the worst from selfish/lazy people.

QUOTE="mjray, post: 4187798, member: 34410"]
EUromyth. They haven't, although UN regulations say new cars have to have them fitted, it need not be easy to switch them off and so an increasing number of people leave them on.[/QUOTE]

Its a directive from EU. http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/topics/vehicles/daytime_running_lights/index_en.htm

You care too much about what other people think about you, and about what other people wear. Are you 12?

Yes, but stylish.

 

[mjr]

Its a directive from EU. http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/topics/vehicles/daytime_running_lights/index_en.htm

Which references a UN regulation which the UK would almost certainly implement anyway (probably gold-plating it as usual), only applies to new cars and still doesn't make their use compulsory.